lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Yonik Seeley (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Commented: (LUCENE-1771) Using explain may double ram reqs for fieldcaches when using ValueSourceQuery/CustomScoreQuery or for ConstantScoreQuerys that use a caching Filter.
Date Wed, 05 Aug 2009 01:12:15 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1771?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12739298#action_12739298
] 

Yonik Seeley commented on LUCENE-1771:
--------------------------------------

bq. I'm confused... why is that a bug?

Because it's maxDoc() not numDocs() that's used in the idf calculation... so if you tried
to duplicate the idf calculation given the explain factors, it wouldn't match up for terms
with deleted docs.

> Using explain may double ram reqs for fieldcaches when using ValueSourceQuery/CustomScoreQuery
or for ConstantScoreQuerys that use a caching Filter.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LUCENE-1771
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-1771
>             Project: Lucene - Java
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Search
>            Reporter: Mark Miller
>            Assignee: Mark Miller
>             Fix For: 2.9
>
>         Attachments: LUCENE-1771.patch, LUCENE-1771.patch, LUCENE-1771.patch, LUCENE-1771.patch
>
>


-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message